User talk:BeatriceX

Tying Darwin to homeopathy -- disruption warning level 1
I wish there was emotion on my part, as this would mean your attempts were something new. Probably 1000s of editors try, each year, to use wikipedia to promote their pet theory, their cousin, their new girlfriend--some succeed in varying degrees. In particular, among these promotionists, are people who read a single article or had an exciting encounter with a pseudoscience and come to wikipedia with the intention of promoting that encounter with pseudoscience in article space.

You find Ullman awesome. You think what he wrote about Darwin is fascinating. We got it.

There's plenty of work to do on wikipedia. You're welcome to do some of it. But please don't continue to use article talk space to promote your theory.

See: Disruptive editing, in particular note the summary section and its links:

"Wikipedia owes much of its success to its openness. However, that very openness sometimes attracts people who seek to exploit the site as a platform for pushing a single point of view, original research, advocacy or self-promotion. While notable minority opinions are welcome when verifiable through reliable sources, and constructive editors occasionally make mistakes, sometimes a Wikipedia editor creates long-term problems by persistently editing a page or set of pages with information which is not verifiable through reliable sources or insisting on giving undue weight to a minority view."

Provide references showing the significance of the Ullman article or stop using wikipedia article talk pages to promote it and him. Thank you. --Kleopatra (talk) 09:08, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Please stop harassing me and calling me names. I gave the sources in the appropriate talk pages. Please do not contact me again.--BeatriceX (talk) 09:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:15, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

AN/I notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Kleopatra (talk) 11:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions
Per Requests_for_arbitration/Homeopathy you may be topic banned without further warnings if you continue to misuse Wikipedia as a soapbox for promoting novel ideas. Your contribution history appears to be entirely related to the promotion of homeopathy and suggesting links between Darwin and homeopathy. Other editors have been giving you good advice, but you seem unwilling to listen to feedback. Jehochman Talk 14:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Your investigation is insufficient and inaccurate. Can you give me 3 examples of my soapboxing and also include reasons ? Do not tell me that you agree with Cleopatra- it  is not enough. --BeatriceX (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Once again Beatrice, you fail to click on a supplied link within which is valuable information to help you become a better editor. If you did click the link, you would see what Jehochman is talking about and why he doesn't need to justify himself to you prior to him blocking you from editing the troublesome articles.  Moral is, read and become informed.  Alternatively you can continue in your current pattern and be blocked.  Your choice and unfortunately I'm confident it is a scenario that you are already too familar with :-(  Shot info (talk) 10:30, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Homeopathy
Please log in, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Homeopathy and click on the, 'Edit' link, next to the, 'Parties' agreement to mediation'. Then, when the next window shows up, type, '# Agree. and 4~ (to create your signature)' at the bottom of that section. Then, click on 'Save Page'. Thank you,-Xdjq (talk) 15:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * BeatriceX, this account has no other edits besides this "request for mediation." There's no need for you to participate, respond, or interact. You can find this information out in the future by going to your edit page history and clicking on the editor's contributions. This editor has contributed, as of this point, to exactly two pages on wikipedia:


 * 1) Requests_for_mediation/Homeopathy
 * 2) User talk:BeatriceX


 * An indicator that you should have checked out the user's contributions before engaging him/her for any reason is his red-linked user and user talk page. You, by the way, also have a red-linked user page.


 * The party has no standing to request mediation on anything, and the page should just be deleted. Please do not feel the need to participate in it. --Kleopatra (talk) 18:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * That account was blocked by and I've deleted the page per WP:CSD.  Jehochman Talk 15:45, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
Your account is blocked for sock or meat pupptry, per discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (link) as well as persistent violations of Wikipedia is not for soapboxing, even after I left you a warning. Jehochman Talk 15:45, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * This administrative decision to declare a "sock" with seemingly no evidence is quite strange. I assume that some people may have thought this BeatriceX was me...it is NOT.  I have found a chronic and frequent problem here at wikipedia:  anyone who writes intelligently and who references good literature that may give some positive light to homeopathy is BLOCKED for any possible reason.  BeatriceX was deemed a "single purpose" account even after editing just one week.  Wow!  Even when BeatriceX references Darwin's own writings, her information is ignored, she is attacked, and she is blocked.  Wow.  How sad.  DanaUllmanTalk 16:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Dana, some of the evidence is on this very page. See the section headed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Homeopathy, and also see the rest of Xdjq's edits, in particular this one: "A friend of mine who has been editing wikipedia told me to do what I've done, so please mediate."  The editor's next edit, after starting the now-deleted request, was to inform Beatrice that he had done it.  This appears to have been an account set up purely to start a Request for mediation on BeatriceX's behalf.  And, as noted above, the meatpuppetry is not the only reason for this ban - see the warnings above, and see, for example, the attempts to introduce the material to articles that BeatriceX actually admitted had nothing to do with it.
 * It might also be a good idea to reacquaint yourself with this. Brunton (talk) 13:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I wonder if we just watched the sockpuppeteer appear? Arrogance breeds this sort of odd behavour... Shot info (talk) 07:56, 13 February 2011 (UTC)