Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:05, 10 December 2006

Warnings

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Stephen Barrett, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. -- Fyslee 19:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Please try to write in a measured, nuanced, encyclopedic and factual way. Excessive and tendentious edits might disturb the work of other editors and be reverted. You might find reading WP:POV useful in this respect. Thank you.

Please stop. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Furthermore, reinserting the same commentary multiple times may cause you to violate the three-revert rule, which can lead to a block. -- Fyslee 20:25, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop using Misplaced Pages for personal attacks

It is a well-known fact that you hate certain people. Take it elsewhere, like Usenet. Misplaced Pages is not a place to carry on your attacks. -- Fyslee 22:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Final warnings

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Misplaced Pages's NPOV rule by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. -- Fyslee 18:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam

Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Misplaced Pages. Thank you. --Ronz 15:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Misplaced Pages, as you did in Stephen Barrett. It is considered spamming, and Misplaced Pages is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. --Ronz 02:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Stephen Barrett, Quackwatch, and NCAHF article

I have started three separate proposals to merge these three articles. The discussion for each amalgamation of the merge begins here. I would appreciate you taking the time to give your thoughts for each proposal. Thanks. Levine2112 06:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Barrett v. Rosenthal

Even if you're not banned from the article, you're in danger of violating WP:3RR. Stop immediately. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 15:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Barrett's propensity to change history will not be tolerated.'

I have added pertinent and relevant information, with appropriate links.

What the EFF says is FAR more relevant than one of Barrett's publicists.

Every word I wrote is accurate.

— Arthur Rubin | (talk) 16:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Could I suggest that mundane editorial disagreements are most likely to resolve quickly and productively when editors observe the following:

• Remain polite per WP:Civility.
• Solicit feedback and ask questions.
• Keep the discussion focused. Concentrate on a small set of related matters and resolve them to the satisfaction of all parties.
• Focus on the subject rather than on the personalities of the editors.

Thanks! --Ronz 21:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks! --Ronz 00:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue spamming, as you did in Barrett v. Rosenthal, you will be blocked from editing. --Ronz 20:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The National Council Against Health Fraud

Please stop. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to The National Council Against Health Fraud, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. --Ronz 02:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Ilena 16:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)I find an enormous amount of bias here for Barrett. It is NOT my point of view that NCAHF was suspended by the State of California, nor is it my point of view that NO ONE has shown any proof whatsoever that is a legal corporation capable of accepting donations that it solicits in Massachusetts.

When I first began reading here a few days ago, the FACTS regarding Barrett's case against me were absolutely falsely stated from their desired point of view.

I do not understand why you continue to protect the fact that NCAHF was suspended.

Ilena Rosenthal

Ilena, just what do you think the suspension means? You keep including it as if you think it was something that passes Misplaced Pages's notability and trivia guidelines. (BTW, notice the sig is always placed at the end of the comment, not at the beginning. Just four tildes, nothing more, and nothing less.) -- Fyslee 23:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Ilena, it seems to me that you are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigating edit wars. --Ronz 01:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Barrett

Ilena:

It seems to me that you are acting in an uncivil manner on Talk:Stephen Barrett. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigating edit wars. --Ronz 15:55, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Ilena This is absurd. You advertise the loser, Barrett's website and remove pertinent websites around my winning side of this case.

Is there no one at Misplaced Pages to be encyclopedic and not make Misplaced Pages another Barrett bullied front group?

How can Ronz remove my sites and add Barrett's and call this "unbiased."

Ilena Rosenthal

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/blog.htm#arthurrubin