|
The fact that the word "doctor" is in your username does not have to mean that you are a medical doctor. Even if a checkuser confirms your IP address goes to a medical establishment, that does not constitute proof that you are an M.D. You could be a nurse, a techie, an administrator, or a secretary, among other possibilities. You stated that it was too late to change the username. Actually it's not. If you would like to change your username, you can request it at WP:RENAME. (I'm not suggesting you should; there's nothing wrong with the one you have.) Aleta Sing 20:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Further to our correspondence, the essential point, which it is necessary to appreciate, is tha wikipedia DOES NOT CARE who writes articles, and creating an article carries no assertion of competence in the field in question. All data must be subject to reference, original research data are prohibited, and personal expertise, while it will clearly help in article creation, is not recognised as an automatic authority. In short, it is not acceptable to say, or imply, "I am trained in this field and therefore know what I am talking about". This is in no way meant to denigrate your skills and qualifications; I am just saying that they are not relevant in a wikipedia context. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 10:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Many seem concerned that I will say "I'm a doctor so my word is final". This is not the case. I just want some sort of verification so nobody will think that I am a drug company pushing a medicine or a convict trying to do something criminal. The fact that User:Dr Spam (MD) is not on his or her best behavior and they are probably not a doctor is very disturbing. That's why I don't want anyone to have any doubt about me. Thatcher has already spilled the beans that I am a doctor writing from my office but it was too indirect for my liking. Doctor Wikipedian ( talk) 18:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't believe the username to be problematic in itself, but I've inquired about the matter at the Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents, here, on your behalf. Further discussion may take place there. As for your username, it appears that you have discussed the matter at length with administrators more experienced than myself, so I'm not sure I have any additional advice for you. All edits, including yours and mine, are required to be neutral, verifiable, and backed by Reliable Sources; if you edit in this fashion, then your edits will not be questioned. You can't post information about a medical procedure, for example, and cite "I know this to be true because I am a doctor", as that would be removed rapidly. But, if you cite something like the JAMA, then you would be fine. In short, I don't think you'll have any problems at all. Please feel free to leave me a message if you have any further questions. Welcome to Wikipedia, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I notice that you have been trying to get your credentials verified before you begin editing. I will put this as simply as I can... This will not happen. There is no use arguing about, we cannot and do not verify credentials on this site for a variety of reasons. Contributers are judged by their contributions not by their backgrounds, if you make good edits you have nothing to worry about. If you cannot edit without verification than you cannot edit, it is as simple as that. Let me know if you need any help with any other topics. -- Daniel J. Leivick ( talk) 19:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Are you an official representative of Wikipedia and speak for the Wikipedia Foundation? It is ok, if you speak for yourself as this gives me a gauge on the feelings of a Wikipedian.
I also ask you if it is not an offense to impersonate a doctor? Ethically it may be but if it is not a Wikipedia offense, please let me know. Some acts are illegal in certain places but not in others. For example, making critical comments about the King of Thailand can result in punishment but such comments are not illegal in the UK. So if impersonating a doctor is ethically wrong and illegal in certain places but that there is no Wikipedia rule against it, please let me know, Daniel. Doctor Wikipedian ( talk) 21:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Your userpage is now longer than mine. joshschr ( Talk | contribs) 23:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
You are enrolled in my research study. I am not certain whether to put you in the real name or fake name. I am inclined to put you in the fake name category although you seem like you will act like people in the real name category based on your concern about verifying IP. Good luck. JerryVanF ( talk) 01:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
This is not acceptable. You can not insert yourself into another checkuser case. Do not do so again. It has been explained to you now by numerous editors including at least two checkusers ( Thatcher and Alison), at least three other administrators ( Anthony.bradbury, User:Daniel J. Leivick, and myself), as well as Joshschr and Frank, that Wikipedia does not try to verify anyone's credentials. That is at least seven editors who have all told you basically the same thing. What matters here is not your credentials, but what edits you make including the sources you use. Please cease this campaign across numerous talk pages, and just work on the encyclopedia. Aleta Sing 02:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
|
The fact that the word "doctor" is in your username does not have to mean that you are a medical doctor. Even if a checkuser confirms your IP address goes to a medical establishment, that does not constitute proof that you are an M.D. You could be a nurse, a techie, an administrator, or a secretary, among other possibilities. You stated that it was too late to change the username. Actually it's not. If you would like to change your username, you can request it at WP:RENAME. (I'm not suggesting you should; there's nothing wrong with the one you have.) Aleta Sing 20:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Further to our correspondence, the essential point, which it is necessary to appreciate, is tha wikipedia DOES NOT CARE who writes articles, and creating an article carries no assertion of competence in the field in question. All data must be subject to reference, original research data are prohibited, and personal expertise, while it will clearly help in article creation, is not recognised as an automatic authority. In short, it is not acceptable to say, or imply, "I am trained in this field and therefore know what I am talking about". This is in no way meant to denigrate your skills and qualifications; I am just saying that they are not relevant in a wikipedia context. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 10:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Many seem concerned that I will say "I'm a doctor so my word is final". This is not the case. I just want some sort of verification so nobody will think that I am a drug company pushing a medicine or a convict trying to do something criminal. The fact that User:Dr Spam (MD) is not on his or her best behavior and they are probably not a doctor is very disturbing. That's why I don't want anyone to have any doubt about me. Thatcher has already spilled the beans that I am a doctor writing from my office but it was too indirect for my liking. Doctor Wikipedian ( talk) 18:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't believe the username to be problematic in itself, but I've inquired about the matter at the Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents, here, on your behalf. Further discussion may take place there. As for your username, it appears that you have discussed the matter at length with administrators more experienced than myself, so I'm not sure I have any additional advice for you. All edits, including yours and mine, are required to be neutral, verifiable, and backed by Reliable Sources; if you edit in this fashion, then your edits will not be questioned. You can't post information about a medical procedure, for example, and cite "I know this to be true because I am a doctor", as that would be removed rapidly. But, if you cite something like the JAMA, then you would be fine. In short, I don't think you'll have any problems at all. Please feel free to leave me a message if you have any further questions. Welcome to Wikipedia, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I notice that you have been trying to get your credentials verified before you begin editing. I will put this as simply as I can... This will not happen. There is no use arguing about, we cannot and do not verify credentials on this site for a variety of reasons. Contributers are judged by their contributions not by their backgrounds, if you make good edits you have nothing to worry about. If you cannot edit without verification than you cannot edit, it is as simple as that. Let me know if you need any help with any other topics. -- Daniel J. Leivick ( talk) 19:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Are you an official representative of Wikipedia and speak for the Wikipedia Foundation? It is ok, if you speak for yourself as this gives me a gauge on the feelings of a Wikipedian.
I also ask you if it is not an offense to impersonate a doctor? Ethically it may be but if it is not a Wikipedia offense, please let me know. Some acts are illegal in certain places but not in others. For example, making critical comments about the King of Thailand can result in punishment but such comments are not illegal in the UK. So if impersonating a doctor is ethically wrong and illegal in certain places but that there is no Wikipedia rule against it, please let me know, Daniel. Doctor Wikipedian ( talk) 21:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Your userpage is now longer than mine. joshschr ( Talk | contribs) 23:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
You are enrolled in my research study. I am not certain whether to put you in the real name or fake name. I am inclined to put you in the fake name category although you seem like you will act like people in the real name category based on your concern about verifying IP. Good luck. JerryVanF ( talk) 01:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
This is not acceptable. You can not insert yourself into another checkuser case. Do not do so again. It has been explained to you now by numerous editors including at least two checkusers ( Thatcher and Alison), at least three other administrators ( Anthony.bradbury, User:Daniel J. Leivick, and myself), as well as Joshschr and Frank, that Wikipedia does not try to verify anyone's credentials. That is at least seven editors who have all told you basically the same thing. What matters here is not your credentials, but what edits you make including the sources you use. Please cease this campaign across numerous talk pages, and just work on the encyclopedia. Aleta Sing 02:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)