RoseWrites, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
The
Adventure
|
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
I reverted your edits] to Zika fever - content like that is not what we do here, on a bunch of levels. The "Why Birds as Reservoir Hosts Matter" section was especially off the mark - this is really clearly an effort by you to "get the word out" about something you believe is important, and that is not what Wikipedia is for.
- Please see WP:NOT, and especially the WP:SOAPBOX section, to learn what Wikipedia is, and what it is not.
- Please read WP:MEDMOS, which is the style guide for articles about medicine.
- Please read WP:MEDRS, which describes the kinds of sources that we look for, to support content about health.
Best regards -- Jytdog ( talk) 23:21, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- Dear Jytdog,
- Gee thanks! You have provided crucial evidence that supports others and I have filmed it. It's being sent to the FDA.
- Specifically:
- "Wikipedia cannot say that it was not warned long ago about the corrupt practices going on behind the scenes by some members of its volunteer army of supposedly unpaid editors; an unhealthy culture of manipulation, secrecy, bullying and censorship, driven mostly by the root of all evil: money." Source: http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2013/10/28/wikipedia-editing-scandal
- The book "Wikipedia: Pseudo- encyclopedia of the lie, censorship and misinformation" by Sorin Cerin
- In the current paid editing incident, two Wikipedia editors (both holding the valued position of Wikipedia-In-Residence) have been suspected of directly editing and promoting entries for money. Source: https://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/10/13/wikipedias-dark-side/#.tnw_KZnmjV3i
- You also have to contend with overt censorship, bullying, and ideological thuggery–all of it invisible on the front pages of Wikipedia, but which can be seen on Talk, Revision, and Blacklist pages all over Wikipedia, by the people who control what the general public sees on the front pages. Source: "Fighting Wikipedia Corruption & Censorship" by Dean Esmay
- And yes, you are correct, I am trying to present a clearer picture of the whole truth regarding Zika. But, I am certain you (and others) are compensated handsomely for removing my edits.
- Goodbye credibility Wikipedia and Jytdog.
- Best,
- Rose — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
RoseWrites (
talk •
contribs) 00:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for replying! Sorry for the delay; I only just now saw this.
- Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon ":" in front of your comment, and the WP software converts that into an indent; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons "::" which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages. That is how we know who said what. I know this is insanely archaic and unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog ( talk) 22:54, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well that is quite a reply. Hm. You obviously know some stuff about disease, which is great. But you don't understand Wikipedia. This place is governed by a whole slew of policies and guidelines that have been put in place by the community of editors that have created Wikipedia over the past 16 years. Every time you edit, you actually agree to follow these policies and guidelines -- this is part of the Terms of Use that you agree to, when you save an edit (look at what it says right above the "save changes" button, when you reply to this). Everybody is new at some point and we all know that there is a learning curve.
- If you want to continue contributing that would be wonderful, but please slow down and engage with the policies and guidelines. I provided links to some of them in my initial note to you above. If you want an as-brief-as-possible overview of all of them, please see User:Jytdog/How. The page WP:MEDHOW provides useful orientation for medical/health topics, specifically. Jytdog ( talk) 22:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Jytdog? Who judges the policymakers of Wikipedia? Is it a "might is right" philosophy, or something similar? Polytope4D ( talk) 13:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
RoseWrites, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
The
Adventure
|
|
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
I reverted your edits] to Zika fever - content like that is not what we do here, on a bunch of levels. The "Why Birds as Reservoir Hosts Matter" section was especially off the mark - this is really clearly an effort by you to "get the word out" about something you believe is important, and that is not what Wikipedia is for.
- Please see WP:NOT, and especially the WP:SOAPBOX section, to learn what Wikipedia is, and what it is not.
- Please read WP:MEDMOS, which is the style guide for articles about medicine.
- Please read WP:MEDRS, which describes the kinds of sources that we look for, to support content about health.
Best regards -- Jytdog ( talk) 23:21, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- Dear Jytdog,
- Gee thanks! You have provided crucial evidence that supports others and I have filmed it. It's being sent to the FDA.
- Specifically:
- "Wikipedia cannot say that it was not warned long ago about the corrupt practices going on behind the scenes by some members of its volunteer army of supposedly unpaid editors; an unhealthy culture of manipulation, secrecy, bullying and censorship, driven mostly by the root of all evil: money." Source: http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2013/10/28/wikipedia-editing-scandal
- The book "Wikipedia: Pseudo- encyclopedia of the lie, censorship and misinformation" by Sorin Cerin
- In the current paid editing incident, two Wikipedia editors (both holding the valued position of Wikipedia-In-Residence) have been suspected of directly editing and promoting entries for money. Source: https://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/10/13/wikipedias-dark-side/#.tnw_KZnmjV3i
- You also have to contend with overt censorship, bullying, and ideological thuggery–all of it invisible on the front pages of Wikipedia, but which can be seen on Talk, Revision, and Blacklist pages all over Wikipedia, by the people who control what the general public sees on the front pages. Source: "Fighting Wikipedia Corruption & Censorship" by Dean Esmay
- And yes, you are correct, I am trying to present a clearer picture of the whole truth regarding Zika. But, I am certain you (and others) are compensated handsomely for removing my edits.
- Goodbye credibility Wikipedia and Jytdog.
- Best,
- Rose — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
RoseWrites (
talk •
contribs) 00:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for replying! Sorry for the delay; I only just now saw this.
- Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon ":" in front of your comment, and the WP software converts that into an indent; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons "::" which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages. That is how we know who said what. I know this is insanely archaic and unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog ( talk) 22:54, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well that is quite a reply. Hm. You obviously know some stuff about disease, which is great. But you don't understand Wikipedia. This place is governed by a whole slew of policies and guidelines that have been put in place by the community of editors that have created Wikipedia over the past 16 years. Every time you edit, you actually agree to follow these policies and guidelines -- this is part of the Terms of Use that you agree to, when you save an edit (look at what it says right above the "save changes" button, when you reply to this). Everybody is new at some point and we all know that there is a learning curve.
- If you want to continue contributing that would be wonderful, but please slow down and engage with the policies and guidelines. I provided links to some of them in my initial note to you above. If you want an as-brief-as-possible overview of all of them, please see User:Jytdog/How. The page WP:MEDHOW provides useful orientation for medical/health topics, specifically. Jytdog ( talk) 22:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Jytdog? Who judges the policymakers of Wikipedia? Is it a "might is right" philosophy, or something similar? Polytope4D ( talk) 13:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)